September 8, 2026
Mayor Elizabeth Pabon-Alvarado and City Council
City of San Pablo
1000 Gateway Avenue
San Pablo, CA 94806
Re: Item 23 – Consider Adopting an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Pablo Adding Chapter 9.60 to the San Pablo Municipal Code Establishing the City of San Pablo’s Rent Review Program Effective January 1, 2027
Dear Mayor Pabon-Alvarado, Vice Mayor Xavier, and City Council,
The California Apartment Association (CAA) appreciates the City’s efforts to explore a Rent Review Program that is fair, balanced and responsive to the needs of the whole community while continuing to support housing investment and operations.
According to the staff proposal, the Rent Review Program would include conciliation, mediation and if necessary, rent review board hearing. We hope the Council will consider the following items:
Rent Payments during Rent Review Process
First, the proposed rent review program does not appear to address what rent the tenant is required to pay while the rent review process is pending. We recommend the policy state whether tenants are required to deposit certain amount of the disputed rent increase while the rent review process is pending.
Notice of Availability of Rent Review (Section 9.60.040) The ordinance requires housing providers to notify tenants of the Rent Review Program in the two most common languages and states the City will provide the translation. We ask that the requirement for housing providers to provide this notice to tenants is not operative until the City has published the notice in both languages.
It was also unclear whether the notices must be provided with any rent increase or only rent increases over 7%.
We recommend that the City also educate and notify the community about the program.
Rent Review Board Hearing (Section 9.60.065 B)
CAA recommends keeping the participants consistent throughout the process. The rent review program allows housing providers and tenants to participate in conciliation and mediation. However, at the Rent Review Board Hearing, it allows those same participants AND “other persons deemed necessary” by the Economic Development and Housing Manager or the Rent Review Board. We believe this language is too broad and recommend that participation remain consistent with the earlier stages of the process, notably with just the housing provider and tenant.
Rent Review Board (Section 9.60.070 A)
We appreciate the balanced composition of the Rent Review Board, which includes two tenants and two housing providers and one neutral person. While we appreciate the requirement for the housing providers to own AND reside in San Pablo, this may be difficult for some housing providers. Please consider allowing housing providers with property in San Pablo to also serve on the Board, even if they are not currently residing there.
Retaliation Prohibited (Section 9.60.080 B)
Section 9.60.080 B states that the housing provider carries the burden of proof that an adverse action was not in retaliation. This provision generally conflicts with California law governing presumptions and burden of proof. (Fisher v City of Berkeley) Registration and Fees (Section 9.60.090)
The Council recently repealed its Rental Registry in favor of pursuing a rent review program. This proposal includes a line stating the City “may require Housing Providers to register units.” We ask you consider removing this line and instead require any future rental registry program to come back to City Council for consideration before being implemented.
Also, the proposal states that both housing providers and tenants may be asked to pay reasonable fees necessary to administer this program. We ask the City to clarify the anticipated costs and include a fair and balanced cost-sharing provision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Ewen Rizzo
Vice President, Government Affairs
California Apartment Association